Average Tuition Discount for Freshman: 45%

The higher-education story of the week is about cost: colleges and universities are cutting prices. At least that’s the impression one gets from media coverage of the annual report from the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO). “Colleges Cut Prices by Providing More Financial Aid,” states the Wall Street Journal. “Private U.S. colleges, worried they could be pricing themselves out of the market after years of relentless tuition increases, are offering record financial assistance to keep classrooms full.”

Many colleges are “lowering” prices, but not because they’re messing with their hefty sticker prices. In fact, American colleges and universities engage in a massive system of price discrimination, offering students varying discounts from the sticker price depending on family income and assets, number of children in college, and other family financial factors. While the amount of the discount largely depends on a family’s ability to pay for college, many colleges also offer price breaks to students based on “merit,” as measured by SAT scores and high school GPA.

According to the NACUBO’s 2012 Tuition Discount Study, the average tuition discount for freshmen rose to a record 45 percent. “In fact, the report says, the “growth in the freshmen discount rate between 2010 and 2011 was 2.3 percentage points, the largest one-year increase in the nearly 20-year history of the discounting study.”

Here Come the ‘Enrollment Managers’

Indeed, higher education is a curious and strange business – and it’s not generosity that’s driving colleges and universities to provide more financial aid. Instead of just slashing sticker prices to stay competitive, colleges offer “tuition discounts” in the form of scholarships and grants of various amounts. The bottom line is what’s called the net price, which is the total cost of attendance – sticker price plus expenses – less institutional grants and scholarships. By making some students and parents pay full fare, or close to it, while offering discounts to less wealthy students, colleges attempt to maximize net tuition revenue. Indeed, after many years of engaging in the “high sticker price, high discount” business model, colleges have acquired armies of “enrollment management” consultants who advise colleges on the best strategies for maximizing tuition revenue.

After years of relative stability, between the years 2000 and 2006, when average tuition discounts for freshmen ranged between 37 and 38 percent, discounts began to climb more rapidly. In those relatively flush economic times of the mid 2000’s, many colleges were engaged in a sort of arms race for certain high-achieving students whose enrollment and matriculation would boost average SAT scores and boost the institution’s ranking on college guides such as U.S. News & World Report. Colleges attempted to attract such students with hefty discounts.

Smaller Colleges Suffered More

But the Great Recession arrived, and students and families took big hits on income and wealth. According to the US Federal Reserve’s Study of Consumer Finances released in 2012, the median value of inflation-adjusted pre-tax income fell 7.7 percent from 2007 and 2010 and median net worth of families fell 38.8 percent. In order to maintain enrollments during the recession, colleges steadily ratcheted up discounts.

Tough times were especially punitive to smaller colleges. Many of these colleges struggled to maintain enrollments and used discounts to stem enrollment losses. But often the discounts simply gobbled up revenues because student demand for many of the weaker institutions wasn’t sufficient to offset the price cuts. Indeed, the discount rate at small colleges rose to 46.2 percent in 2012 compared to 41 percent and large research institutions and just 40 percent at comprehensive doctoral universities.

The Great Recession may have changed the higher-education industry for good, serving as a wake-up call for wholesale reforms in pricing. Poor economic conditions exposed profound weaknesses in Americans’ ability to pay for college. Financial need will remain high, but poorly endowed private schools will continue to struggle to stay competitive and stave off enrollment declines. Also, public universities are seeing state tuition subsidies erode, and they face pressure to raise tuitions to uncompetitive levels.

Apart from the most desirable, highly branded colleges and universities, the rest of the industry has reached an unsustainable state. Long-term demographic projections suggest enrollment growth will continue to hold steady or even decline. Too many financially strapped institutions suggest that the industry may be overcapitalized and due for a shakeup – with too many relatively weak institutions chasing a limited number of desirable students. Making matters even more complicated is that financial need continues to grow and the condition of family finances remains tenuous.

“It gets harder every year,” one chief business officer reported in the NACUBO’s survey. “There are many indicators the business model that higher education has relied on for many years may have to change.”

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment

Name *

Email *

Website

Sign me up for the newsletter!

Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter

Email address:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

Please! Support Our Work and DONATE

Minding the Campus, the website written mostly by courageous professors who choose to educate rather than proselytize students to their world view, needs your help. Even a small donation makes a big difference. Click here to donate now.

Notable

Western Civilization = White Supremacy

New York City school administrators have been taught that pillars of Western Civilization such as objectivity, individualism, and even belief in the written word all are examples of … white supremacy, theNew York Post reports.

A slide presentation obtained by the Post from the workshop “Dismantling Racism: A Workbook for Social Change” includes claims that a belief in an “ultimate truth” (objectivity) leads to a dismissal of “alternate viewpoints or emotions” as “bad” (this is straight out of the critical race theory playbook), and that emphasis on the written word overlooks the “ability to relate to others” and leads to “teaching that there is only ‘one right way’ to do something.”

Other “hallmarks” of white supremacy include a “sense of urgency,” “quantity over quality,” and “perfectionism.” Read more at The College Fix

The Civility Problem

Maybe a few courses on how to create a civil society would help America's so-called "social warriors" learn how to deal with their fellow men and women. Let's start with Amherst College in Massachusetts, where former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was scheduled to address the ongoing issue of free speech on campus. Campus Reform reports that Sessions got a dose of today's SJW tactics when a stinkbomb was set off before he went on stage. Then, a walkout was staged by a gay pride group punctuating the assault on the former A.G. Stinkbombs? What is this, 7th grade?

Studying 'Angry White Males'

The University of Kansas has approved a course called “angry white male studies,” open to all students willing to take a women’s studies course first. The course on white males will explore recent changes in demographics since the 1950s. Republican Congressman Ron Estes took a dim view, arguing that ”KU is offering a class that divides the student population and could pose a TitleIX violation by creating a hostile campus movement based on gender.” The course will be taught by Christopher Forth, who focuses on gender, fat-shaming, and masculinity.

Erasing White Men from Politics

Believing that courses on American political thought are too fixated on white males, Professor Chad Shomura of the University of Colorado at Denver has solved the problem by banning discussion of white men in his course on the nation’s political thought. This means nothing from Washington, Jefferson, Tocqueville, Rousseau or any of the pre-Obama presidents. Discussion of the Hillary Clinton race for the presidency in 2016 is allowed, but how she managed to lose while apparently “running unopposed” is unclear.

No Free Speech: Heckler Cancels Another Student Meeting

Last week, a group of at least 4 Portland State University police officers stood by and declined to intervene as a heckler with a cowbell single-handedly canceled a College Republicans meeting. This is the second time in 2019 that PSU allowed hecklers or would-be hecklers to shut down campus expression — and the second time the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has demanded the university adhere to its First Amendment obligations. FIRE first wrote to the university Feb. 18 after PSU’s law enforcement unilaterally canceled a meeting of a socialist student group after the founder of the group Patriot Prayer said he would show up.

Be Careful What You Wish For on Social Programs

Nathan Glazer, the last of a group of famous neocon social scientists, died at the age of 95 on January 19 at his home in Cambridge, Mass. (He resisted the label “neocon.”) Glazer consistently warned that vast government plans to improve the lives of the poor often come to grief or create new problems of their own. “The evaluations of the specifics of the first ten years after the launching of (the War on Poverty) confirm that nothing worked and in particular, nothing in education worked.” He concluded that the family was the key institution to positive social change and that rights are inherent in individuals, not groups. The article here by Howard Husock of the Manhattan Institute ran in 2011 when President Obama planned an extension of the War on Poverty.

Reader Letter of the Week

There are two real dangers to this anti-white mindset that its proponents don’t seem to comprehend.

First, a minority of foolish and morally bankrupt white people can, will, and do buy all the social justice arguments and place themselves on the other side. That’s how you get white nationalist groups who say, “Yes, it is a power struggle between whites and everyone else, and we intend to come out on top.”

Second, and far more serious, the vast majority of white people who still hold to the tenets of individualism and equality will see the social justice warriors as a real and direct threat to their safety, culture, and future and react accordingly. As when we fought the Nazis and the Communists, there’s no need to agree with an enemy or even hold him in any regard as serious to recognize him and defeat him.

Either way, the result is division, civil unrest, and even war. Unfortunately, in this case, the SJWs have created a landscape in which there is no middle ground. It is one side or the other. The Feminists will fall first because there is no way to have a serious conflict between the sexes, and women are immensely practical creatures. But the other groups will find themselves in a very nasty position of facing a frightened and angry majority that has no intention of offering itself up for sacrifice. And when they mobilize, the “battle” won’t be metaphorical.

David S. Zondy

Write for MTC

Interested in writing for us?

Calling all professors, college newspaper reporters and editors who believe in diversity of thought as well as culture and ethnicity. Minding the Campus aims to expose today’s single lane thought highway at today’s universities and find solutions to the growing monoculture of ideas that silences the contrarians. MTC also has a commitment to due process and reports on how accusations of sexual assault on campus can convict a student who was denied legal representation. If you want to know more, please click here to read more.